No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
In the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series are included thirteen dramas which the learned editor, Mahāmahōpādhyāya T. Gaṇapati Śāstri, has assigned to Bhāsa, the predecessor of Kālidāsa. The various arguments advanced by him in support of his theory may be summed up thus:—
The thirteen dramas, which we shall hereafter term the T.B. dramas, display a similarity of structure as regards the prologue and poetic merit, and have some common passages. It is, therefore, assumed that they are the works of one and the same author. Rājaśēkhara says that Bhāsa has written many dramas, one of which is Svapna-vāsavadatta; and Bāṇa says that Bhāsa's dramas open with a speech by the Sūtradhāra. Since one of the T.B. plays is named Svapna-vāsavadatta, and since they all open with a speech by the Sūtradhāra, it is inferred that Bhāsa is the author of all of them. The question whether their language is antique enough to justify their ascription to a predecessor of Kālidāsa is also discussed. The presence of archaisms, the simplicity of the Sanskrit, and the ‘freshness” of the Prakrit are urged as arguments for an answer in the affirmative. It is also claimed they have such poetic merits as to offer even Kālidāsa a model. This position is apparently substantiated by pointing out various ideas common to both these dramas and the works of Kālidāsa.
page 107 note 1 See above, vol. i, pt. iii, pp. 35 ff.—L. D, B.
page 107 note 2 On Puranic authority.—L. D. B.
page 107 note 3 Cf. Pratimā, Act IV, verses 9 and 10, etc.
page 108 note 1 The omission of details for the sake of time-economy, and of scenes because of the practical difficulty of representation on our stage, and the consequent necessity of recasting the language to gloss them over, will go far to explain the assumed novelty of Cārudatta.
page 108 note 2 Kērala supplies at least one positive instance of the worship of the statues of one of her sovereigns. In the temple at Tiruvañjikulam, the old capital of the Perumāḷs, there is set up and worshipped the statue of the last of the Perumāḷs, Bhāskara Ravi Varma Cēramān Perumāḷ. In view of the connexion of this prince and the T.B. dramas with the Malabar stage, we are inclined to think that the statue incident in the Pratimā is based upon this deification. That it is a product of Malabar is still further emphasized by the fact that Sītā keeps away from and does not participate in the coronation ceremony of Rama; cf. Pratimā, Act I. This is based upon the practice of Kerala, where the king's wife has no part or place in her lord's coronation.
page 108 note 3 See Sukthankar, V. in JAOS., vol. xl, pp. 248Google Scholar ff.; vol. xli, pp. 1 fi.; Lesný, V., Vývojový stupeň nářećί prākṛtských v dramatech Bhāsových, Prague, 1917Google Scholar; Printz, W., Bhāsa's Prakrit, Frankfurt a. M., 1921Google Scholar; JRAS., 1919, pp. 233 ff.Google Scholar; 1921, pp. 367 ff., 587 ff.; 1922, p. 79 ff.; Morgenstierne, G., Über das Verhaltniss zwischen Cārudatta und Mṛcchakaṭikā, Leipzig, 1921.–L. D. B.Google Scholar
page 112 note 1 The Śāstri assigns the dramatist Kulaśēkhara Varma Perumāḷ to the twelfth century. Apart from other evidences, we may here observe that the ancient city of Tiruvañjikulam, which is mentioned as his capital, was a deserted ruin in the twelfth century. It was completely destroyed by Rājēndra Cō
a at the beginning of the eleventh century.
page 112 note 2 This is the most popular drama among the Malayalis, and is more often staged than any other in the series. Both from the literary and the dramatic point of view it deserves a very high place, second only to that of Kālidāsa. MSS. of it are readily available. We are preparing an edition, which we hope to publish soon.
page 113 note 1 To this list may be added two other dramas. The first is Unmāda-vāsavadatta of Śaktibhadra, as may be gathered from the prologue appended. The other is Śākuntala, which, tradition says, was staged and then abandoned owing to the difficulty of acting it properly. This may account for the structural peculiarities in the manuscript of Śākuntala to which we have referred elsewhere.
page 113 note 2 The Vidūṣaka's reciting a vernacular translation of the Sanskrit originals acted by the Nāyaka and the introduction of current events, political and social, may be brought under the head of popularization.
page 113 note 3 The introduction of mass-scenes, of battles, and of deaths may be mentioned in support of this.
page 113 note 4 The omission of the Sūtradhāra reciting the nāndī and the opening of the drama by the Sūtradhāra acting the sthāpanā may be cited as an instance of this. A vigorous stage, under the direction of a practical dramatist, would naturally try for the sake of economy to delete unnecessary characters, expecially when actors have to appear on the stage in their respective character-costumes. Of the two Sūtradhāras that the laws of orthodox dramaturgy require for the prologue, the function of one is simply to recite the nāndī (benedictory verse) and retire. To dress up a character for this purpose, which from the actor's point of view is so unimportant, cannot appeal to a practical dramatist, the more so as the dressing, as required by the reformed stage, is very elaborate. Owing to the need for character-economy, as demanded by a practical stage, the functions of the Nāndī-Sūtradhāra and the Sthāpanā-Sūtradhāra have been combined.
Definite light on the earlier, and therefore the more important, phases of the reformation might be obtained from the Vyaṅgya-Vyākhyāna on the Tapatīsaṃvaraṇa, written by a contemporary of Kulaśēkhara Varma Perumāl, from the actors' point of view and for their guidance.
page 114 note 1 Some salient features of the acting of a Sanskrit drama in Kērala are described in “Acting in Kērala”, by K. R. Pisharoti, published in the Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society of Bangalore, 04, 1922, pp. 283 ft.Google Scholar As regards the date of Bhāskara Ravi Varma Perumāḷ, there is a difference of opinion. Here is given the date at which Mr. A. K. Pisharoti has arrived in his history of Kērala, which is about to be published.
page 116 note 1 Here and in other like cases the MS. represents original ry by a double a. I have transliterated by yy; cf. Piachel, , GPS.Google Scholar, § 284.–L. D. B.